Kerry Mocks ...

Bush's 'Itsy Bitsy' Campaign Slogan

The Ponderosa mocks Kerry's un-manly (non-manly, really) reliance on wealthy wives and a government paycheck, his 30 year record of being wrong on virtually everything, particularly matters of national survival, and his pathological desire to earn the approval of corrupt European has-been powers ...

Advantage At This Point Is Bush's In A Tug-O-War ...

... For Middle Class

"This election is shaping up as a battle for the hearts and minds of America's middle class — the silent majority on whose backs the economic success of this country rests.

...

Exit polls from the 2000 presidential election show that three-fourths of the electorate is either middle class or upper-middle class. More specifically, close to half of voters (46%) identified themselves as middle class and another fourth (27%) as upper middle. One in five (18%) said they belonged to the working class. Only a handful identified themselves as upper class (4%) or lower class (2%).

In that election, Bush edged Gore 49%-48% among middle-class voters and secured the upper-middle class vote by a healthy 11-point margin ( 54%- 43%).

Gore had the upper hand with both upper- and working-class voters. Among the self-identified upper classes, Gore won 56%-39%, and among the nation's working class Gore prevailed 51%- 46%. "

While we understand how the "working class" (in the fevered minds of Leftists, anyone earning over 50k per annum does not "work") can be counted on to vote Marx -- er, Dem, it has always fascinated us that so many in the "upper" class do so.

We reckon that when you make (or inherit or marry or sue) a bazillion dollars a year, you don't really care what the taxes on that are -- guilt and self-loathing kick in -- as opposed to the 200K a year earners targetted by the World's Ugliest Gigolo.

We love our Marines

Kerry (he was in Vietnam) annoys Marines at Wendy's

"In Newburg, N.Y., they made an unscheduled stop to celebrate John and Elizabeth Edwards' 27th anniversary.

The couple observed their anniversary tradition of a meal at Wendy's, a nod to their early married days when it was all they could afford.

Kerry joined them inside and spied a table of Marines. But when he struck up a conversation, the Marines answered tersely and expressed irritation.

"He imposed on us and I disagree with him coming over here to shake our hands," said one, who did not give his name."

No word on whether Edwards plans to sue the servicemen.

World's Homliest Gigolo Annoys Marine

Kerry's Economic Remedy...

... Won't Be Revealed Before Election

A top economic advisor to Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said the public won't hear Kerry's financial plans until after he's elected - if he's elected.

In the Aug. 2 cover story of "Business Week," former Clinton administration treasury secretary Robert Rubin said, "I don't think you can make proposals to try to dig out of this hole until you've gotten elected ... If you start to put out proposals now, they would be vigorously attacked and they would in effect become tainted so they couldn't be used."

Rubin's the dude who peddled the notion that you confiscate the wealth of the investor class so that deficits decrease, leading to lower interest rates (no historical evidence of this relationship exists) making it easier for the investor class to ... borrow their money back to invest (apparently, you need to be some sort of Ivy League "genius" to grasp this "logic").

None of this happened in the '90's, but, true to form, the Clintonistas took credit for the recovery they inherited anyhow ...

By the way ... why does a growing economy need a remedy?!

The difference between Man and Boy

We don't recall George H. W. Bush and Robert Dole dwelling on their heroism in WWII.

Contrast that with the Democrat nominee, who cannot pass an ice cream stand without lapsing into reminiscences of Vietnam -- "When I was in Vietnam we were allotted a ration of Heavenly Hash" ... Men vs. Boy ...

Just so's no one thinks we're blinded by party affiliation ...

We caught bits of a campaign stop today wherein Bush stated that Congress should pass a law mandating comp and vacation time for hourly workers ... dumb idea ...

Terrorists "oui", child murderers "non" ...

Most people are focusing on the headline of this piece: AP: Kerry in Favor of U.S. Bin Laden Trial ... but we read a bit further:

Kerry has long been an opponent of the death penalty, but in recent years has made an exception for terrorism. The former prosecutor said crimes like rape and child murder do not warrant the highest punishment.

"It's certainly terrorizing to the person who's undergoing it. I understand that," Kerry said. "But terrorism is a political act to terrorize a nation, to try to challenge a way of life and a standard.. It's just a different act."

Given the Senator's "nuanced" position on infanticide, perhaps we should not be surprised that he does not see cold blooded murder, even of a child, as worthy of punishment by death.

Now, perhaps were the victim a hamster ...

False alarm

Turns out there is no truth to the rumor that John Edwards demanded the driver of his campaign tour bus follow a passing ambulance.

This sounds positively ... MULTILATERAL!!!

NATO Agrees to Start Training Iraq Forces

Horowitz weighs in

The Biggest Liar of Them All

Now we can understand why Democrats spent the last year attacking the President as someone who lied to take America into an unnecessary war and destroy brave young American lives for his corporate friends in Texas. They did it to disarm and anesthetize us, to deconstruct the very idea of what truth is or what a fact is or what is is -- and prepare us for the most shameless charade in  political memory, the phoniest convention for the phoniest party ever to mount an American electoral stage.

In Boston the Democrats -- the party of Al Sharpton, Jimmy Carter, Teddy Kennedy and Michael Moore -- presented themselves as the party of patriotism and military glory and American military strength, and John Kerry as a man whose life has been one long preparation to be commander-in-chief. "I am John Kerry," he saluted his audience to begin his convention speech, "reporting for duty." Pardon me while I hurl. This is a man who came back from Vietnam to stab not only his country but his comrades-in-arms in the back. This is a man who to this very day has an honored place in the Communist enemy's "War Crimes Museum" -- that's American war crimes. This is a party and a wannabe commander in chief that has clamored and voted to oppose America's wars in Vietnam, the Persian Gulf and in Iraq. This is a party and a commander in chief that lent comfort and aid to Communist dictators in Central America during the last years of the Cold War and nearly brought the Reagan presidency down for attempting to oppose the Communist tide.

This is a man and a party that voted to cut America's military and its intelligence services year after year, a man and a party who refused to institute the security measures that would have prevented 9/11. And this is a man and a party that has sabotaged the war on terror since the day Baghdad was liberated, that has embraced the reprehensible traitor Michael Moore, and the antiwar left of the Dean campaign, that has spread monstrous lies about its commander in chief and and in doing so undermined the nation's credibility and defenses. If another terrorist state were to become a threatening nuclear force (Iran comes immediately to mind) what American president can now face that enemy down with a credible military threat?

This is a party that from the beginning to the end of its convention pretended to be what it is not. And that is because it fears that American people already know what it is.

... still more ...

I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response.

I realize I never served in Vietnam, but isn't the idea to PREVENT attacks?

I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security.

Yet you berate Bush for going forward without Saddam's buddy Chirac ...

Hoo boy ...

What does it mean when Deborah Kromins from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania works and saves all her life only to find out that her pension has disappeared into thin air – and the executive who looted it has bailed out on a golden parachute?

The Argument Ad Misericordium, aside from being cheesy, is considered fallacious logic.

Life will always suck for someone somewhere.

Imagine the caterwauling ...

... from the media should GWB use 911 in his convention speech ...

Remember the hours after September 11th, when we came together as one to answer the attack against our homeland. We drew strength when our firefighters ran up the stairs and risked their lives, so that others might live. When rescuers rushed into smoke and fire at the Pentagon. When the men and women of Flight 93 sacrificed themselves to save our nation's Capitol. When flags were hanging from front porches all across America, and strangers became friends. It was the worst day we have ever seen, but it brought out the best in all of us.

Man ...

And what can I say about Teresa? She has the strongest moral compass of anyone I know. She's down to earth, nurturing, courageous, wise and smart. She speaks her mind and she speaks the truth, and I love her for that, too.

Plus, she's got $$$ up the wazoo!

John Kerry: Economic Ignoramus

And I will roll back the tax cuts for the wealthiest individuals who make over $200,000 a year, so we can invest in job creation (...)

That a 60 year old man believes that taxing the investor class is a means of investing in "job creation" would be laughable if there weren't half the country ready to vote for the stunod.

This is economic illiteracy rarely seen apart from the writings of Robert Reich and Paul Krugman.

No idea what this means ...

I want an America that relies on its own ingenuity and innovation – not the Saudi royal family.

No idea what this has to do with the Saudis -- other than as a sop to the Fat Boy. Further, it's the ingenious and innovative he wants to raise taxes on.

And our energy plan for a stronger America will invest in new technologies and alternative fuels and the cars of the future -- so that no young American in uniform will ever be held hostage to our dependence on oil from the Middle East.

The new "technologies and alternative fuels" will come to be when someone figures out how to make a profit by producing them. Sadly, this means someone will get rich.

Zzzzzzzzz ....

As President, I will fight a smarter, more effective war on terror. We will deploy every tool in our arsenal: our economic as well as our military might; our principles as well as our firepower.

Already happening.

In these dangerous days there is a right way and a wrong way to be strong. Strength is more than tough words.

strength is kicking the crap out of two evil regimes and frightening a third into acquiescence.

We need to make America once again a beacon in the world. We need to be looked up to and not just feared.

We prefer to be feared, not respected, by the Jihadists.

We need to lead a global effort against nuclear proliferation – to keep the most dangerous weapons in the world out of the most dangerous hands in the world.

Already happening.

Senator, pay attention ...

You don't value families if you force them to take up a collection to buy body armor for a son or daughter in the service

Bad enuff this is coming from a guy who spent 2+ decades voting against defense spending, but this was debunked ages ago ...

Continued ...

(A)nd let's never misuse for political purposes the most precious document in American history, the Constitution of the United States.

We're guessing he's referring to the Federal Marriage Amendment. Regardless of the merits of the FMA, the amendment process cannot properly be labeled a "misuse" of anything. It's simply the process put in place to change the Constitution.

Contrast this to the Left's view of a "living" Constitution, wherein the document means everything and nothing depending on a Justice's whim. THAT is misuse.

... this is too easy ...

Saying there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq doesn't make it so.

Kerry on WMD

... and more ....

I will be a commander in chief who will never mislead us into war.

According to at least three separate investigations, we already have one. Clearly, an appeal to the Moore Wing of the party.

I will have a Vice President who will not conduct secret meetings with polluters to rewrite our environmental laws.

Does he mean the Energy Task Force? Why, in Kerry's World, are those who actually PRODUCE something of value always described in the worst possible terms. One minute he's blathering about energy independence, the next he's bashing those that would make it possible.

I will have a Secretary of Defense who will listen to the best advice of our military leaders.

I have never heard anyone suggest otherwise of Rumsfeld.

And I will appoint an Attorney General who actually upholds the Constitution of the United States.

We are guessing he means the Patriot Act that he and Edwards voted for, which is making it easier to keep tabs on the Mohammedans in our midst ... this is a naked appeal to Dean and his kooks ... as far as we know, free gay internet porn is still available at the library!

More ...

We value an America that controls its own destiny because it's finally and forever independent of Mideast oil. What does it mean for our economy and our national security when we only have three percent of the world's oil reserves, yet we rely on foreign countries for fifty-three percent of what we consume?

It means "Screw the greenies -- let us drill in Alaska and build more nuke plants."

Did Moses propose privatizing Social Security?

We believe in the family value expressed in one of the oldest Commandments: "Honor thy father and thy mother." As President, I will not privatize Social Security. I will not cut benefits. And together, we will make sure that senior citizens never have to cut their pills in half because they can't afford life-saving medicine.

Yo, Kerry -- keepa you Rosaries offa my securities!

By the way ... weren't all the Commandments issued at the same time?!

Unfit for Command?

My neighbor two doors down would make a fine President of the U.S. How do I know that? Well, he served in Vietnam. Listening to the World's Homeliest Gigolo last night, you'd think that was the supreme qualification, the sine qua non, of a Commander in Chief.

We can't say we blame Kerry for stressing his service -- it's really the last impressive part of his life. Returning home, he immediately turned against his "band of brothers", calumniating them as war criminals and generally making the case for the enemy. Not good.

From Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT) :

John Kerry's lies about the activities of the Swift boats were part of a larger pattern of deception. As a leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), Kerry testified before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on April 22, 1971, telling the Senators and a national audience that American troops "...had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam..." and accused the U.S. military of committing war crimes "on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command."

Kerry's charges were based on a VVAW conference called the "Winter Soldier Investigation" -- a leftist propaganda event funded primarily by Jane Fonda. None of the Winter Soldier "witnesses" Kerry cited were willing to sign affadavits, and their gruesome stories lacked the names, dates and places that would allow their claims to be tested. Few were willing to cooperate with military investigators. The Naval Investigative Service found that several of the veterans said to have given statements at Winter Soldier were in fact imposters using the name of real veterans.

False testimony and exaggerations were primary characteristics of the war crimes disinformation campaign, and also of the VVAW itself. Executive Secretary Al Hubbard, for example, claimed to have been an Air Force Captain wounded in Vietnam piloting a transport plane. In fact, Hubbard had been a staff sergeant who was not a pilot and who was never assigned to Vietnam.

John Kerry and the VVAW worked closely with America's wartime enemies, arranged multiple meetings with the North Vietnamese and Vietcong leadership, and consistently supported their positions. Kerry and his radical comrades also played a key role in defining the false, damaging image of Vietnam veterans as psychologically disabled alcoholics and addicts, haunted by the crimes they had been forced to commit in a "racist" war.

Detailed information about the anti-war activities of John Kerry and the VVAW can be found at WinterSoldier.com.

Never having served ourselves, we will leave the debunking of Kerry's war hero status to the SBVT and the authors of Unfit for Command : Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry.

What we can comment on is Kerry's life and career since Vietnam: his marriage to two wealthy women (did he leave his balls at the Mekong Delta?) -- he attempted to have his first marriage annulled despite it having produced two children -- and his unblemished record of being wrong on nearly every matter of national security and intelligence, from his support for the insane nuclear freeze movement to his love of Danny Ortega and the Sandanistas, to his opposition to military and intelligence spending on men and machines. In 2004, it is difficult to wade through his dozens of positions on the current conflicts and know exactly where he stands, and his insistence on subjugating our security to corrupt governments in France, Germany and Russia is just -- well, stupid.

It is not an impressive record, certainly not one that displays any of the "wisdom" he pretends to offer, and we can see why, post-911 he is attempting to whitewash his past.

The economic "program" offered by Kerry and his barratrist running mate is the same warmed over Marxism the Dems have been offering for decades: rich guys bad (except those who were born, married or sued their way into great wealth), everyone else good. If you make over 200k a year, you are, apparently, part of the problem.

Throughout the next couple days, we will examine parts of last night's speech. For the most part, we will leave the correction of factual errors (there were many) to the pros, though we reserve the right to chime in on the most egregious fibs.

So ... awaa-aaay we go!

John Kerry gladhands commie thug Danny Ortega. The simp who looks like he just saw his first naked lady is the dippy, Way Left Senator from Iowa, Tom Harkin.

Ann fricassees Kook Fest 2004

Dems' New Slogan: No Teacher Left Behind

...

Despite colossal efforts by the Democrats to fake out Americans and pretend the Democrats are normal Americans who love their country, every once in a while they make a mistake and give us a "tell." The Democrats have carefully studied Americans, observed their habits and expressions, so you would think for five days the Democrats could pull off a passable impression.Special-effects artists are working overtime. Gore was prohibited from screeching about Republicans being Nazis, and Clinton was told not to show up in a toga. Democrats unable to conceal their America-hating pacifism were relieved of their anti-war signs and escorted to the free-speech veal pens a few blocks from the convention center.Convention organizers even forced the delegates to choke their way through the Pledge of Allegiance -- something the teachers' students are not allowed to say. The delegates play along, pretending they know the words and making the occasional random reference to "God," trying not to sound ironic.
...

In a prepared speech carefully reviewed by the Democrats' Americanization team, Jimmy Carter said: "After 9/11, America stood proud." Proud? I believe "proud" was the last emotion most Americans were feeling after 9/11, coming in considerably behind, for example, "fighting mad," "incensed," "enraged," "humiliated" and "vengeful." It didn't occur to any of the Democrats vetting Carter's speech to cut that line? "What's the matter, Prince? Why are you growling? That's just a moderate Democrat."

...

Indeed, the belle of the ball at the convention is noted patriot Michael Moore, who apparently thinks Americans who voted for George Bush deserved to be killed on 9/11. The day of the attack, Moore wrote this on his Web page: "Many families have been devastated tonight. This is just not right. They did not deserve to die. If someone did this to get back at Bush, then they did so by killing thousands of people who DID NOT VOTE for him! Boston, New York, D.C. and the planes' destination of California -- these were places that voted AGAINST Bush!" Perhaps Moore could provide the terrorists with a map of the red states before the next attack.

...

IBD: Bush's first term economy beats Clinton's

http://www.investors.com/editorial/issues.asp?v=7/28

So let's measure first term against first term — apples to apples. If we do, Bush comes out on top — even after 9-11.

Don't believe it? Look at the key gauges of our well-being — growth, inflation, unemployment, disposable income (what's left after taxes), productivity, household assets and consumer confidence.

On most of these, Bush wins. Yes, GDP growth on a year-over-year basis is a bit slower. But, as we noted, Bush took office with a recession under way [The Ponderosa: Bill "Infidel in the Temple" Rodham Clinton inherited an expansion!]. It wasn't Bush's recession; it was Clinton's.

As for the other data, here's how Bush's first-term stacks up: Inflation? Lower. Disposable income? Higher. Household assets? Richer. Consumer confidence? Slightly lower, but comparable. Unemployment? A bit higher, but again about the same. Productivity? Way better under Bush.

...

Bush's record, we suspect, will look even better four years hence. All the key elements for a sweet decade of economic growth are in place. But you won't hear that in Boston.

This is an old one, but we weren't around at the time

(May 17 -- Alexandria, VA) Today, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group of more than 220 Swift Boat veterans from the unit in which John Kerry served, call on Kerry to stop the unauthorized use of their images in national campaign advertising.

For example, the photo in Kerry’s national campaign ads contains 20 officers, including Kerry, 11 of whom signed a letter condemning Kerry yet their image is being widely used in his own campaign. It was taken on the island of An Thoi on January 22, 1969. These officers together with Swift Boat Veterans for Truth call upon him to cease the unauthorized use of their photo by his campaign. They are jointly submitting the attached letter to John Kerry. (Photo, letter to Kerry, link to authorized use of the photo and earlier letter to Kerry below.)

Of the remaining eight officers in the photo: two are deceased and four do not wish to be involved in any manner; only two of the 20 are believed to support Kerry.

Robbins: For all their bluster ...

the Democrats are foreign-policy wannabes

In part, the Democrats are constrained by the internal party politics of the national-security question. They have settled on a few safe themes designed maintain party unity and not alienate the centrist voters they need to win. However, when it comes down to stating actual policies, vagueness is the rule. We hear frequently that John Kerry is committed to "hunting down the terrorists" or "finishing the job in Afghanistan," the national security equivalent of being in favor of Mom and apple pie. The Democratic platform states that "With John Kerry as commander-in-chief, we will never wait for a green light from abroad when our safety is at stake," yet the Democrats would also oppose the use of military force absent a broad international consensus. What this balancing act would mean in practice is anybody's guess, but one suspects it heralds a return to the temporizing security posture of the Clinton years. Senator Kerry has stated that he "can run a war that's more thoughtful and more effective" than President Bush, and half the pages in the Democratic platform mention the war on terrorism in one way or another. But the Democratic policy proposals are either nebulous, or echoes of actions the Bush administration has already taken. They include things like improving intelligence capabilities (being done), cutting off terrorist funds (being done), preventing Afghanistan from being a terrorist safe haven (pretty much accomplished almost three years ago), and engaging in democratization efforts to strike at the roots of the terrorism problem (sounds suspiciously like the president's Greater Middle East Initiative).

The Democrats have also shown little in the way of imagination or new ideas when it comes to broader issues of national security. While the Bush administration has been implementing the revolutionary policies of Defense Transformation modernizing our overseas deployment structure through the Global Posture Realignment, and reconceptualizing the meaning of 21st-century national security in a series of thoughtful, groundbreaking national strategic documents, the best the Kerry team can come up with is that the United States should implement the 9/11 Commission recommendations. This tells me is that they either have no ideas of their own to offer, or they are so afraid to be pinned down they seek specificity by proxy. Kerry compounded this impression when he stated that the commission should stay on for an additional 18 months, issuing semi-annual reports on the implementation of their suggestions. His team thinks this would be an effective way to "bird dog the bureaucracy," essentially putting national security reform on autopilot. Ignoring the fact that the commission has no oversight function and could easily be ignored by both the executive and Congress, wouldn't a real leader say that he would evaluate the commission's report, that he would seek to implement suggestions that he thought had merit, and that he would hold his own bureaucracy responsible for making the necessary reforms? Surely he would — and George Bush already has.

Take also nuclear nonproliferation. Many speakers at the convention have discussed its importance, and the platform accuses the president of ignoring the issue. The Democrats offer a series of proposals, each of which hinges on getting the interested parties around a table and hammering out an agreement. This was the approach the Clinton administration took with North Korea, and which facilitated Pyongyang's successful development of nuclear weapons. At the same time, the Democrats refuse to give the president credit for the innovative and much more practical achievements in non- and counter-proliferation of the past few years. The centerpiece is the multinational Proliferation Security Initiative, which in one year has attracted sixty signatory nations, and the list is growing. The administration has also taken a hard line with North Korea, prompted renewed international inspections in Iran, and guaranteed that Iraq will not pose a proliferation threat in the future. Libya was persuaded to forsake its nuclear ambitions, and the US broke up the Pakistani nuclear black market of Abdul Qadeer Khan. The Democrats can keep saying that nothing has been accomplished but that just tells me that they have not been following the issue very closely.

What we endure for you people ... last night we sat through a debate" between ...

... O'Reilly and that obese dude who makes anti-American movies full of lies and deceptions ...

It's clear why Moore needs to make films to express himself -- he is a terrible speaker and a rotten debater, relying on non-sequitirs, flawed analogies, logical fallacies and, yes, lies.

On a few occasions he left O'Reilly holes big enough to drive -- well, to drive Michael Moore through. Sadly, O'Reilly isn't as sharp as he likes to believe and he dropped the ball a couple times, enabling the corpulent commie to live to lie (and eat) another day.

BILL O'REILLY: The issues… all right good, now, one of the issues is you because you’ve been calling Bush a liar on weapons of mass destruction, the Senate Intelligence Committee, Lord Butler’s investigation in Britain, and now the 9/11 Commission have all come out and said there was no lying on the part of President Bush. Plus, Vladimir Putin has said his intelligence told Bush there were weapons of mass destruction. Wanna apologize to the president now or later?

MOORE: He didn’t tell the truth, he said there were weapons of mass destruction.

O'REILLY: Yeah, but he didn’t lie, he was misinformed by - all of those investigations come to the same conclusion, that’s not a lie.

MOORE: uh huh, so in other words if I told you right now that nothing was going on down here on the stage…

O'REILLY: That would be a lie because we could see that wasn’t the truth

MOORE: Well, I’d have to turn around to see it, and then I would realize, oh, Bill, I just told you something that wasn’t true… actually it’s president Bush that needs to apologize to the nation for telling an entire country that there were weapons of mass destruction, that they had evidence of this, and that there was some sort of connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11th, and he used that as a –

O'REILLY: OK, He never said that, but back to the other thing, if you, if Michael Moore is president –

MOORE: I thought you said you saw the movie, I show all that in the movie

O'REILLY: Which may happen if Hollywood, yeah, OK, fine –

MOORE: But that was your question –

O'REILLY: Just the issues. You’ve got three separate investigations plus the president of Russia all saying… British intelligence, U.S. intelligence, Russian intelligence, told the president there were weapons of mass destruction, you say, “he lied.” This is not a lie if you believe it to be true, now he may have made a mistake, which is obvious –

MOORE: Well, that’s almost pathological – I mean, many criminals believe what they say is true [The Ponderosa: he oughta know!], they could pass a lie detector test –

O'REILLY: Alright, now you’re dancing around a question –

MOORE: No I’m not, there’s no dancing[The Ponderosa: That shaking we felt musta been a minor shift in the Earth's plates.]

O'REILLY: He didn’t lie

MOORE: He said something that wasn’t true

O'REILLY: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate sources

MOORE: Now you know that they went to the CIA, Cheney went to the CIA, they wanted that information, they wouldn’t listen to anybody[The Ponderosa: According to the Senate report, this is incorrect.]

O'REILLY: They wouldn’t go by Russian intelligence and Blair’s intelligence too

MOORE: His own people told him, I mean he went to Richard Clarke the day after September 11th and said “What you got on Iraq?” and Richard Clarke’s going “Oh well this wasn’t Iraq that did this sir, this was Al Qaeda.”[The Ponderosa: Again, incorrect. It's doubtful anyone could have known with certainty on 9/12 that Iraq was not involved.]

O'REILLY: You’re diverting the issue…did you read Woodward’s book?

MOORE: No, I haven’t read his book.[The Ponderosa: Moore only reads menus]

O'REILLY: Woodward’s a good reporter, right? Good guy, you know who he is right?

MOORE: I know who he is.

O'REILLY: Ok, he says in his book George Tenet looked the president in the eye, like how I am looking you in the eye right now and said “President, weapons of mass destruction are a quote, end quote, “slam dunk” if you’re the president, you ignore all that?

MOORE: Yeah, I would say that the CIA had done a pretty poor job.

O'REILLY: I agree. The lieutenant was fired.[The Ponderosa: Actually, he quit.]

MOORE: Yeah, but not before they took us to war based on his intelligence. This is a man who ran the CIA, a CIA that was so poorly organized and run that it wouldn’t communicate with the FBI before September 11th [The Ponderosa: Is he blaming Gorelick's "wall"?]and as a result in part we didn’t have a very good intelligence system set up before September 11th[The Ponderosa: Thank you John Kerry and his fellow travellers in Congress]

O'REILLY: Nobody disputes that...

MOORE: Ok, so he screws up September 11th. Why would you then listen to him, he says this is a “slam dunk” [The Ponderosa: Because he's the CIA director and you have no alternative source for intelligence other than your INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES! Man, this is tiring.]and your going to go to war.

O'REILLY: You’ve got MI-6 and Russian intelligence because they’re all saying the same thing that’s why. You’re not going to apologize to Bush, you are going to continue to call him a liar.

MOORE: Oh, he lied to the nation, Bill, I can’t think of a worse thing to do for a president to lie to a country to take them to war
[The Ponderosa: Howz about spending more time being fellated by a fat girl than
pursuing the enemies of civilization], I mean, I don’t know a worse –

O'REILLY: It wasn’t a lie

MOORE: He did not tell the truth, what do you call that?

O'REILLY: I call that bad information, acting on bad information – not a lie

MOORE: A seven year old can get away with that –

O'REILLY: Alright, your turn to ask me a question—

MOORE: ‘Mom and Dad it was just bad information’—

O'REILLY: I’m not going to get you to admit it wasn’t a lie, go ahead

MOORE: It was a lie, and now, which leads us to my question

So, what do we make of this. Apparently, Bush was supposed to disregard all intelligence to the contrary and believe that Hussein was a good boy. Either that, or parachute into Iraq with a map, a compass, and a list of suspected WMD sites and verify the intelligence himself.

Stupid, stupid Moore.

It gets sillier:

MOORE: So you would sacrifice your child to secure Fallujah? I want to hear you say that.

O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself—

MOORE: Your child—Its Bush sending the children there.

O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself.

MOORE: You and I don’t go to war, because we’re too old [The Ponderosa: Mikey, you're too damned FAT!]—

O'REILLY: Because if we back down, there will be more deaths and you know it.

MOORE: Say ‘I Bill O’Reilly would sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah’

O'REILLY: I’m not going to say what you say, you’re a, that’s ridiculous

MOORE: You don’t believe that. Why should Bush sacrifice the children of people across America for this?

Moore trots out this same fallacious reasoning in his propaganda pic, and O'Reilly totally blows it here.

No one is "sacrificing" anyone. We have an all volunteer force made up of adults, not "children". We would love to see the reaction of the Marines of Fallujah -- real men -- at being called "children" by the bulbous Bolshevik. Prolly pound a few of the Quarter Pounders out of his bowling-ball sized head.

Anyhow, as for the question, it's a silly one: "Mrs. O'Neill, would you be willing to sacrifice your
child on Normandy?"

What parent wouldn't say "hell no!"?

Would Fat Boy be willing to risk sacrificing his child -- well, ok, his pastry chef -- and the lives of thousands of other Americans (presumably including children) to stick to the quixotic belief that Hussein was never, ever, ever gonna hand off the recipe for Anthrax to a Mohammedan?
These are the decisions grown ups have to make ... the toughest decision Flint Fats has to make is: "McDonald's or Wendy's?"

MOORE: Look let me tell you something in the 1990s look at all the brutal dictators that were removed. Things were done, you take any of a number of countries whether its Eastern Europe, the people rose up. South Africa the whole world boycotted---

O'REILLY: When Reagan was building up the arms, you were against that.

MOORE: And the dictators were gone. Building up the arms did not cause the fall of Eastern Europe.
[The Ponderosa: this should come as news Gorbachev]

O'REILLY: Of course it did, it bankrupted the Soviet Union and then it collapsed.

MOORE: The people rose up.[The Ponderosa: And were crushed by tanks the size of Michael Moore]

O'REILLY: why? Because they went bankrupt.

MOORE: the same way we did in our country, the way we had our revolution. People rose up—

Ridiculous metaphor, Fat Boy -- in 1776, the average farmer could pack as much firepower as a Redcoat ...

MOORE: But that was the reason

O'REILLY: The weapons of mass destruction

MOORE: That we were told we were under some sort of imminent threat

O'REILLY: That’s right

We cannot believe the "imminent threat" canard lives on. The only person we've heard claim Iraq posed
an "imminent threat" was ... JOHN
"FOLLOW THAT AMBULANCE" EDWARDS:

But I do think that the more serious question going forward is, what are we going to do? I mean, we have three different countries that, while they all present serious problems for the United States -- they're dictatorships, they're involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -- you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries. I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country.

Anyhow, it was painful enough going through this the first time ... we are off to seek an iced tea and vodka.

...

Great GOP video presentation chronicling Kerry's various positions ...

... vis-a-vis Iraq ...amazing transformation from reasonable to ... whatever his position is today ...

Just caught the following oh-so-clever sound byte from the lunatic Algore's speech ...

Wouldn’t we be safer with a president who didn’t insist on confusing al-Qaida with Iraq? Doesn’t that divert too much of our attention away from the principal danger?

Perhaps Gore was off on one of his famous "bathroom breaks" when  the Clinton Administration's 1998 indictment of Usama Bin Laden was handed down:

4. Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in theSudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist groupHezballah for the purpose of working together against their perceived commonenemies in the West, particularly the United States. In addition, al Qaedareached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would notwork against that government and that on particular projects, specificallyincluding weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with theGovernment of Iraq.

Back to your rubber condo, Algore!

Michael Mooooo-er is a big, fat, stupid, white ...

... intellectual property thief!

AUSTRALIAN artist and filmmaker George Gittoes has objected to American Michael Moore's use of some of his work a controversial movie.

Mr Gittoes said today Mr Moore had incorporated about 17 selections from his own documentary film Soundtrack to War into Fahrenheit 9/11.

They depicted American soldiers and their music in Iraq.

"I was concerned of course for my soldiers because their interviews were taken out of context," Mr Gittoes said on Channel 9.

"There are about 17 scenes from my documentary in his film. I wouldn't go so far as to say he lifted (them).

...

"Mine's a better film. My film's balanced. I don't think there's a lot of balance in 9/11."

...

"He doesn't go out to Iraq like I do and dodge bullets. He makes it from mainly archival footage and the stuff that other people shoot."

This is not surprising, inasmuch as Lefties have no regard for property rights -- witness their redistributionist tax and hand out policies.

As far as dodging bullets goes -- Fahrenheit Fats couldn't dodge a skyscraper ...

From Moorewatch, check out how Flint Fats ...

... dummied up a newspaper headline in his flatulent farce:

For the past week or so we here at MOOREWATCH have been on top of a story on how Michael Moore completely faked a newspaper headline declaring that Al Gore won the 2000 election.  (See here, here, and here for the whole story.) Well, an interpid reader named Stuart Hayashi, who first brought the story to our attention, managed to get ahold of a librarian who had access to the microfiche archives of the Bloomington Pantagraph.  Despite being a self-professed Moore fan, she agreed to fax me a copy of the disputed page.

...

Well, my friends, as you will see the actual page looks absolutely nothing like what Moore presented onscreen.

The guy dummies up a newspaper page to make a letter to the editor look like a feature story,and Bush is the liar?!?!

We sure do live in "fictitious times", don't we Big Boy?